President Pohamba Is Watching Namibia From The Balcony

I HAVE just returned from an immersing cultural visit of the old city of Athens, Greece. Nothing appeared to suggest that the city that is the birthplace of democracy and Aristotle’s ground-breaking philosophy of reason is the terminally-ill lady of Europe.

Five weeks ago, the International Monetary Fund and the Euro-zone countries agreed a bailout package of about 110 billion Euros in order to save the country from a humiliating bankruptcy. The austerity measures accompanying the bailout, including public-sector wage cuts, have been met with nationwide protests. Still, there was a certain normal tone in Athens, similar to what I experienced on my visit last year. What the façade of an Athens going about business as usual suggests is that the ills of a country can be concealed. Normalcy can be a façade, even a myth. I believe that as a country, it is where we are. There is a façade that seeks to hide in the official discourse and actions, the many of the big and small challenges we face as a country. We have been living with these for many years – some have become more accentuated. In the process citizens have become immune to suffering. Until when, one would not be certain.Many of the challenges we face have been neatly and candidly captured by the CEO of Old Mutual, African Operations Johannes Gawaxab in a paper (20 Years of Namibia’s Business Environment) delivered during the Public Lecture Series for our 20th Independence Anniversary. It demands the attention and reading of any serious policy-maker, including advisors to the President. It ought to be the unofficial counter-manifesto for government action. The most salient point raised by Gawaxab is that we are stuck in the middle and there seem to be no urgency to push forward. Gawaxab explains this in part by saying, ‘we have accepted mediocrity as something we cannot change’. Gawaxab provides lucid examples explaining our inertia (perhaps mediocrity) including; TESEF (our BEE version) frame-work that has been ‘work in progress’ in OPM for almost a decade; a competition law passed in 2003 through the Trade Ministry, but only operational last year; a mining royalty tax mooted in 2004, but only legally watertight in 2009; a telecoms legal framework mooted in 1999, the act being passed ten years later in 2009. In addition to these, Gawaxab remarks in his balance sheet that ‘Many ministers will insist that their doors are always open and this is often true, but the frustration lies in making a final and lasting impact. Namibian business often does not know where the centre of decision-making power really lies.’What Gawaxab raised are not mythical issues, but these are of strategic concern to all of us. There has not only been a failure of leadership on the strategic issues, but at a tactical level, there has been an absence of crisis management; the Shalli matter is still unresolved; the anomaly of the Attorney General-Minister of Presidential Affairs is a blot that may puzzle future constitutional academics; and the phony permanent secretary reshuffle whose objectives are not rooted in strategic performance, are still features of our public administration; the claws of corruption have permeated many transactions with Government. The short or long end of this is that we are not doing well as we ought to as a country.It is why leadership is exceedingly important in any progressive society. With leadership in a democracy (even a developing one), such direction must come from a leader who is prepared to enter the fray. However, President Pohamba has been oblivious and reluctant to do so, watching Namibia from the balcony, even when the clamour of the crowd forces him to come down. This is a perverse pattern, especially when we think that the Pohamba presidency was rooted in a certain transitional potential. In that sense, it was inspirational. But it seems as if the President is more absorbed in the superficial part of the Presidency. He is annoyed with taking decisions. He has been sticking to a no-drama rule ever since he entered State House, except when some started to talk about him serving only one term. On the whole, President Pohamba has been keeping reality (our realities) at bay. If he is not being deferential by sending individuals and concerns to line-ministers or permanent secretaries, he ignores what the agenda has thrown at him for a decision. Nor does he seem to be the final arbiter in the executive. I am not too sure how relevant President Pohamba is to our times when he scorns the paternal aspect of the Presidency. I don’t know how President Pohamba can achieve a modicum of greatness and respect when he is not prepared to impose himself on the country’s challenges. I don’t know how this is possible when the President is not reacting with urgency to what the national agenda throws at him, and demands from him. Even, in the esoteric world of Greek mythology, a god sitting and watching from the balcony would not achieve greatness.* Alfredo Tjiurimo Hengari is a PhD fellow in political science at the University of Paris- Panthéon Sorbonne, France.